GriffonI92 Posted June 27, 2017 Share Posted June 27, 2017 So, not meant to be a grip and complain post but want to make sure I understand the rules clearly for 8th. My big confusion on reading through is that vehicles have 360 arc for shooting. So I can have my vindicator, back to the enemy, with an inch of tracks being able to see said enemy and still shoot my Demolisher Cannon? It personally makes the pivot and straight line restrictions for flyers kind of pointless as well. This seems very un narrative.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M@verik115 Posted June 27, 2017 Share Posted June 27, 2017 It hasn't been FAQ'd, but for now I am playing vehicles as if they have facing as before. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jolemai Posted June 27, 2017 Share Posted June 27, 2017 Punted to the OR forum as rules queries do not belong in the NR&A. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ishagu Posted June 27, 2017 Share Posted June 27, 2017 So, not meant to be a grip and complain post but want to make sure I understand the rules clearly for 8th. My big confusion on reading through is that vehicles have 360 arc for shooting. So I can have my vindicator, back to the enemy, with an inch of tracks being able to see said enemy and still shoot my Demolisher Cannon? It personally makes the pivot and straight line restrictions for flyers kind of pointless as well. This seems very un narrative.... Assume the vehicle turns to shoot and then reverts back to starting position. No one questions when infantry or monsters shoot backwards or sideways. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xenith Posted June 27, 2017 Share Posted June 27, 2017 So, not meant to be a grip and complain post but want to make sure I understand the rules clearly for 8th. My big confusion on reading through is that vehicles have 360 arc for shooting. So I can have my vindicator, back to the enemy, with an inch of tracks being able to see said enemy and still shoot my Demolisher Cannon? It personally makes the pivot and straight line restrictions for flyers kind of pointless as well. This seems very un narrative.... The vehicle. It has those tracks to enable itself to move and change location. The vindicator drives, fires on the go, then retreats behind cover, you know, a tactic that is commonly used in tank warfare to avoid return fire. So the tracked vehicle being able to move in and direction is not believable, but you don't like that jet fighters have to move at a certain speed in a certain direction or they fall out of the sky? It's very narrative. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bloodgrin Posted June 27, 2017 Share Posted June 27, 2017 It hasn't been FAQ'd, but for now I am playing vehicles as if they have facing as before. Not to be a dick, but what you play is irrelevant. To answer the op, the rules as they are now indeed remove the facing element so yes your example works. Will it be Faq'd? Perhaps For now it is not. You may set up house rules as you wish, but the official rules are no facings. The example given where essentially they are turning taking their shot and returning to their original position is valid for fluff, battle is never static. Movement is always happening. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Acebaur Posted June 27, 2017 Share Posted June 27, 2017 It hasn't been FAQ'd, but for now I am playing vehicles as if they have facing as before. Then you are playing a house rule. There are no facings and no fire arcs anymore. It doesn't make flyers and the 90 pivot pointless. The point of that is not to restrict firing but to restrict movement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain_Krash Posted June 27, 2017 Share Posted June 27, 2017 This change was for the better. There's no more arguing with strict opponents or having discrepancies based on flyer or vehicle facing. It helps speed the game up immensely. The less talk/arguing and more dice rolling is healthier for the format. Krash Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guiltysparc Posted June 27, 2017 Share Posted June 27, 2017 This change was for the better. There's no more arguing with strict opponents or having discrepancies based on flyer or vehicle facing. It helps speed the game up immensely. The less talk/arguing and more dice rolling is healthier for the format. Krash So much this. From a narrative standpoint, it also compresses the movement and shooting phases of the game. Its not that your tank or flyer is moving and then shooting, its shooting while moving. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dam13n Posted June 27, 2017 Share Posted June 27, 2017 Effectively the loss of facings and fire arcs is an extension of wobbly model syndrome. It speeds up gameplay and saves trying to squeeze that nicely painted model into a terrain piece such that the model gets damaged. You can house rule fire arcs back in if you like, but that's not a topic for discussion in the OR. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Irbis Posted June 27, 2017 Share Posted June 27, 2017 The vehicle. It has those tracks to enable itself to move and change location. The vindicator drives, fires on the go, then retreats behind cover, you know, a tactic that is commonly used in tank warfare to avoid return fire. So the tracked vehicle being able to move in and direction is not believable, but you don't like that jet fighters have to move at a certain speed in a certain direction or they fall out of the sky? It's very narrative. This. So much this. People are still wailing on that horse that is by now dead-er than Horus? http://www.thewarstore.com/media/GEG/GEGDMH028.jpg Here, have some more HORSES FOR THE HORSE THRONE Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazyll Posted June 27, 2017 Share Posted June 27, 2017 We're all about simplicity over realism right now. Come back in five to ten years and everyone will feel the opposite. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Irbis Posted June 27, 2017 Share Posted June 27, 2017 We're all about simplicity over realism right now. Come back in five to ten years and everyone will feel the opposite. What realism? More like bloat from past 3 decades, if monstrous creature (especially laughable examples like Tau and Eldar that had no business not being walkers to begin with) can ignore vehicle restrictions and rules, then it's not realism, it's stealth penalty for taking vehicles... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eddie Orlock Posted June 28, 2017 Share Posted June 28, 2017 The question's been asked, answered, and extensively commentaried. We have other places at the B&C to debate on the suitability of simulationist vs. abstract rules sets for model conflict in the dark future. If you wish to continue along that line you will take it to one of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GriffonI92 Posted June 28, 2017 Author Share Posted June 28, 2017 Sorry to fan the grief. I just have the free GW rule set and was making sure I wasn't missing something. I think I'll be sticking with 30K for now... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ishagu Posted June 28, 2017 Share Posted June 28, 2017 Sorry to fan the grief. I just have the free GW rule set and was making sure I wasn't missing something. I think I'll be sticking with 30K for now... Try 8th before you decide anything. It's a slick game to play :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GriffonI92 Posted June 29, 2017 Author Share Posted June 29, 2017 I didn't mean for that to come off snobish lol Just want to see how the Codexs come out. Not going to burn my stuff or anything. haha I did get a game in yesterday and it flowed really well. Just miss the Grimdark and complexity but its still solid and flow really well. Units feel more close to fluff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eddie Orlock Posted June 29, 2017 Share Posted June 29, 2017 Ehem. The question's been asked, answered, and extensively commentaried.I think we're done here. I don't like hard closing threads like this, but OR is not a place for rambling discussions about the escapades of your local group nor musings on thinly rumoured content. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.